So Given science is a larger part of every persons life and the loss of the belief in there being a soul by most modern technologically advanced people, I argue that the world in advanced culture has not gotten morally better.

Really, buildit? Take a look at war-torn Middle East, where religiosity and the belief in the supernatural is ripe. Take a look at ISIS, who egotistically declare that, because they are Muslims, they do not fear death for they "know" dying in battle means bypassing judgement and directly landing in the highest heavens. Take a look at the degree of immorality they exhibit: theft, pillaging, rape, and murder - all in the name of their supposedly benevolent god who wants them to punish and condemn the infidel.

Now compare that with more civilised nations like Sweden and the Netherlands, where the populations consist mostly of atheists and agnostics with a penchant for science. Where people can derive a sharp and superior secular humanism based on golden rules and what science empirically determines best for all. Because of that, the crime rate is the lowest in Europe.

I would argue quite the opposite of what you propound. You have no grounds for what you have just stated. The evidence speaks for itself.

Here again it's not as true as the mass media would have you think as many reported "science facts" about health and the environment are either not true, proven false or misinterpreted by those reporting the news.

I'll grant you that the media sometimes misinterprets findings and scientists have complained about this. But most of what we have stated here comes from scientific consensus where there is no room for conspiracy theories. Remember, their work is peer reviewed.

Who writes the text books? Even basic facts reported in school books is often wrong. An example, how many senses do the science books say animals have? Five right? Sense of taste, smell, sight, hearing and touch. It's taught in almost every Biology book. Yet they forgot sense of balance, acceleration, senses that detect the CO2 build up within your blood. So who lied? Science or the mass media that published it?

I think you talk out of your arse when you misrepresent science here. Science time and again demonstrates that our range of perception is limited and that sometimes we need certain gadgets to dig deeper and give us an idea of the scope of perception of other creatures in the animal kingdom. On our side, technology helps to expand our ken. If you had picked up a book on evolutionary biology you would know, for example, that nature stumbled upon echolocation long before we developed sonar. There is also a type of fish in South America that perceives in terms of electromagnetic fields. A human being can hardly imagine what that must be like and the only way to adequately describe such phenomenon is via the language of mathematics and physics. So your five-senses calumniation has just gone straight out the window!

As for lying, nobody has lied. Science is a tool for discovery and our best method for understanding reality. It is not dogmatic. It is prone to revision and amendment pending further enquiry. It has predictive power because it heeds evidence and calculates. It has in fact improved our lives majorly.

I don't know what biology books you read but I understand that they are oversimplified for children in kindergarten.

"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

So Given science is a larger part of every persons life and the loss of the belief in there being a soul by most modern technologically advanced people, I argue that the world in advanced culture has not gotten morally better.

Really, buildit? Take a look at war-torn Middle East, where religiosity and the belief in the supernatural is ripe. Take a look at ISIS, who egotistically declare that, because they are Muslims, they do not fear death for they "know" dying in battle means bypassing judgement and directly landing in the highest heavens. Take a look at the degree of immorality they exhibit: theft, pillaging, rape, and murder - all in the name of their supposedly benevolent god who wants them to punish and condemn the infidel.

We don't like in the Middle east, I'm singling out America

Now compare that with more civilised nations like Sweden and the Netherlands, where the populations consist mostly of atheists and agnostics with a penchant for science. Where people can derive a sharp and superior secular humanism based on golden rules and what science empirically determines best for all. Because of that, the crime rate is the lowest in Europe.

I would argue quite the opposite of what you propound. You have no grounds for what you have just stated. The evidence speaks for itself.

Sweden and the Netherlands, what idiots keep pointing out those places. Oh let compare the crime there to Some small town in the middle of no where in Canada shall we? They are low population density countries and a bad example to use. Not to mention the laws there are totally liberal and even murder only gets you about 15 years in jail.

Here again it's not as true as the mass media would have you think as many reported "science facts" about health and the environment are either not true, proven false or misinterpreted by those reporting the news.

I'll grant you that the media sometimes misinterprets findings and scientists have complained about this. But most of what we have stated here comes from scientific consensus where there is no room for conspiracy theories. Remember, their work is peer reviewed.

And big money companies have piers who review their results with rubber stamps. Companies like Monsanto, Battelle, and others who are regularly hired by the government.

Who writes the text books? Even basic facts reported in school books is often wrong. An example, how many senses do the science books say animals have? Five right? Sense of taste, smell, sight, hearing and touch. It's taught in almost every Biology book. Yet they forgot sense of balance, acceleration, senses that detect the CO2 build up within your blood. So who lied? Science or the mass media that published it?

I think you talk out of your arse when you misrepresent science here. Science time and again demonstrates that our range of perception is limited and that sometimes we need certain gadgets to dig deeper and give us an idea of the scope of perception of other creatures in the animal kingdom. On our side, technology helps to expand our ken. If you had picked up a book on evolutionary biology you would know, for example, that nature stumbled upon echolocation long before we developed sonar. There is also a type of fish in South America that perceives in terms of electromagnetic fields. A human being can hardly imagine what that must be like and the only way to adequately describe such phenomenon is via the language of mathematics and physics. So your five-senses calumniation has just gone straight out the window!

As for lying, nobody has lied. Science is a tool for discovery and our best method for understanding reality. It is not dogmatic. It is prone to revision and amendment pending further enquiry. It has predictive power because it heeds evidence and calculates. It has in fact improved our lives majorly.

I don't know what biology books you read but I understand that they are oversimplified for children in kindergarten.

Since you never took Biology in College Should I loan you my old book? Plain and simple neither of you sound like you've ever spent a minute in a real lab or worked in a scientific lab. I did it for 20 years in many industries with a secret security clearance for 6 of them. I neither feel a need nor am inclined to share more than that. So accept what I tell you or don't. I just don't care anymore.

Is Lucid Dreaming the brains preparation for the next step of human evolution when we can escape the corporeal bond of our bodies?

"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

Our science has advanced beyond what our homo sapien perception via the senses can give us. The existence of atoms and molecules and subatomic particles are all embraced not because we can see them with our eyes, but because their existence can be deducted with various complicated instruments.

As for air: We actually can visibly observe the effects air has on the world. We can look at fire and explosions and know that in the absence of air, neither can occur. We can observe a windy field, seeing the grass tendrils and trees swaying and being ripped back and forth by the violent passage of air molecules. Many things can be observed by the naked eye--that is why mankind knew about the concept of air long before science allowed us to genuinely study it--but now science allows us to go beyond that.

Physical matter is anything that has mass and takes up space. The reason we are not dead right now--the reason we are not in a vacuum is because we are surrounded by air; we are living in an atmosphere, a reservoir of gaseous molecules that allow terrestrial organisms to respirate. Air is matter. Try to create any vessel that won't collapse without air in it. Air has measurable pressure it can exert (this goes back to our wind idea previously). We can also measure air's weight by using a balloon. Here's a science experiment I would like you to conduct: take a balloon and measure it; then fill it up with air; measure it again; subtract your first measurement from your last. That is the weight of the air you filled it up with.

For further reading in elementary science, R99, I would reference a man named Otto Von Guericke, who did studies on air in 1654.

Now... where is your soul? I'm not even asking for direct observation or empirical evidence. I'll let that slide because I know you could never produce some. Let's just see your highly thought-out, sound reasoning for its existence. There is none of that either.

All I can give you in a physical world is what if's and doubt for the ability of science to ever truly measure something that like dark matter is not of this dimension or universe. After all science has now theorized we are part of a multiverse in order to avoid intelligent design. This is because the calculated universal constant is so precise that the probability of it "just happening" is infinitely small.So again, just because science hasn't discovered it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Hell, half of science is spent looking for and discovering the things we don't know exist. But I'll let you go explain to them that they can stop trying to discover new things, because if it hasn't been found yet, it just doesn't exist.

Is Lucid Dreaming the brains preparation for the next step of human evolution when we can escape the corporeal bond of our bodies?